MML Electrification: progress updates

[edwin_m]

Depends on what's required and specified at the end of the day, and yes maybe Graylings quoted saving may only be achievable by taking stops out but then isn't that the whole idea of the half hourly service to Corby!.

But it's not a benefit of the bi-modes - it would have happened either way.

I don't doubt MML had a good electrification case but when Notwork Rail P*** all the money away then I think questions with regard to future electrification need to be asked. In a lot cases if you get improved performance on Electric then the Bi-mode doesn't need to have the same performance on Diesel, ok against a 222 this may be more difficult for the current spec AT300's but then we don't actually know what is proposed for MML and for those that don't like Bi-modes what's your alternative? other than full electrification which the government is rightly in my view not funding at present.

In the position we find ourselves there was probably no alternative, and had Grayling told it straight then I would most likely have agreed. But to spin bi-modes as an extra benefit is to me indefensible. And to cancel the rest of the scheme, rather than just deferring it pending a detailed investigation into the costs, removes any incentive for NR or the industry to get electrification right in the future.

 

[Kettledrum]

In the position we find ourselves there was probably no alternative, and had Grayling told it straight then I would most likely have agreed. But to spin bi-modes as an extra benefit is to me indefensible. And to cancel the rest of the scheme, rather than just deferring it pending a detailed investigation into the costs, removes any incentive for NR or the industry to get electrification right in the future.

I agree totally. In the position we were in, bi-modes had to be ordered. That would have bought some time, and a phased electrification planned over a longer time frame for:

Kettering to Leicester
Leicester to East Midlands Parkway
East Midlands Parkway to Nottingham
East Midlands Parkway to Derby
Derby to Chesterfield
Chesterfield to Sheffield

At that time the bi-modes would have found work elsewhere such as on XC services.
To cancel all the MML electrification beyond Kettering or Corby shows Grayling to be a man with no vision and no plan.

 

[Flying Phil]

As I said earlier (Post#1167)
"Re the actual electrification of the MML, what is the possibility of progressively installing OHLE on the "easy" open sections of the line, and put non live or 6.25kV, where clearances are reduced? Then the Bi Modes could be running much more as electric only, with cost/environment benefits.
So it is "Creeping Electrification" rather than big bang, whole route or nothing."

 

[Kettledrum]

As I said earlier (Post#1167)
"Re the actual electrification of the MML, what is the possibility of progressively installing OHLE on the "easy" open sections of the line, and put non live or 6.25kV, where clearances are reduced? Then the Bi Modes could be running much more as electric only, with cost/environment benefits.
So it is "Creeping Electrification" rather than big bang, whole route or nothing."

The first part of my creeping electrification campaign plan would be as follows:

The current plans are still for a electricity supply sub-station to be built at Braybooke, approx 12 miles north of Kettering and 2 miles south of Market Harborough. I imagine that this will mean over-head wires will extend beyond Kettering station to Braybooke. Surely it wouldn't be too much of an ask to extend the wires a further 2 miles into Market Harborough station?

 

[Flying Phil]

The extension into Harborough Station makes so much sense especially as they are doing the work of moving the track and platforms - just the cost for putting the foundations for the posts (if not the wires now) would be "lost" in the overall project cost.

 

[edwin_m]

As I said earlier (Post#1167)
"Re the actual electrification of the MML, what is the possibility of progressively installing OHLE on the "easy" open sections of the line, and put non live or 6.25kV, where clearances are reduced? Then the Bi Modes could be running much more as electric only, with cost/environment benefits.
So it is "Creeping Electrification" rather than big bang, whole route or nothing."

6.25kV is a red herring. BR proved that the clearances for that voltage were not significantly less than for the full 25kV and no train equipped for 6.25kV is still on the network today. You might argue that it gets round the revised 25kV clearances, but I suspect the same standard would also create problems for a "new" voltage (it is probably forbidden for new work on "interoperable" lines). Short dead sections are possible with the train probably coasting through, but bi-modes would have the diesels available in the unlikely event of being stranded.

 

[InTheEastMids]

The extension into Harborough Station makes so much sense especially as they are doing the work of moving the track and platforms - just the cost for putting the foundations for the posts (if not the wires now) would be "lost" in the overall project cost.

Given that NR are basically building a new railway from Market Harborough to the A6 overbridge North, that point would seem like the logical place to creep the wires to.

That being said, all this work will make it easier to do it later, because there shouldn't be any nasty surprises for the electrification teams

 

[WymoWanderer]

Went for a little walk today to have a look at the electrification works going on at Wymington on the Beds/Northants border.

First image is looking south on the single slow line at Wymington where you can see some of the quadruple upgrade works have been going on.

Second image image is from the same bridge looking north. On the right of the picture you can see where the new power substation is going to be installed and where the public footpath has been diverted.

No work appears to be going on the fast tracks as yet. Does anyone know when they actually plan to install the piles and OHLE gantries?

 

[Mugby]

The current plans are still for a electricity supply sub-station to be built at Braybooke, approx 12 miles north of Kettering and 2 miles south of Market Harborough. I imagine that this will mean over-head wires will extend beyond Kettering station to Braybooke. Surely it wouldn't be too much of an ask to extend the wires a further 2 miles into Market Harborough station?

The line North from Kettering station includes quite a stiff gradient for the first mile or so. Presumably the thinking is the best place for bi-modes to change over will be the long, straight and level section through Braybrooke, assuming that few of them will stop at Market Harborough?

 

[InTheEastMids]

The line North from Kettering station includes quite a stiff gradient for the first mile or so. Presumably the thinking is the best place for bi-modes to change over will be the long, straight and level section through Braybrooke, assuming that few of them will stop at Market Harborough?

It's actually downhill from Desborough Summit all the way to Market Harborough.
Braybrooke is only significant because it's where the 400 kV Transmission System crosses the MML, so is the obvious place to put a Bulk Supply Point. This can then be connected to the Corby branch at Glendon using a trackside cable.

Given how badly over-budget all the current projects are, and how much investment has been deferred, I suspect NR will do the absolute minimum to allow electric trains to reach Corby. Remember NR's problem is not a lack of attractive (on paper) projects to do, but not having any CapEx left to spend.

Depressingly, this could mean the wires on the main/fast lines stopping South of Kettering, because I don't think the Corby line can be accessed from Platforms 3&4. The last crossover is currently around the A509 Pytchley Road bridge. Project "Creeping Electrification" might end up starting with just getting the fast lines wired to Kettering station?

 

[jyte]

Project "Creeping Electrification" might end up starting with just getting the fast lines wired to Kettering station?

By which point we'll be on Star Wars episode 12, IEPs will be being phased out, Marvel Movie number #125 will be being released, Disney will have joint custody of the planet with Amazon, Google, Apple and Facebook, HS5 will be under construction, Ivanka Trump will be in her fourth term, Elon Musk will have moved to mars, half the country will be underwater and DfT will authorise the completion the wiring on the MML.....

Chris Grayling's 'but bi-modes!' leaves me with no optimism that the government actually wants to be stringing up wires right now.

Sorry for the rant....

 

[Olaf]

There will be no new electrification on classic lines (other than as part of other projects such as HS2 sundries) until the DfT has been able to demonstrate to the Treasury that any such project can be delivered on time and to budget by whomever is contracted to do the work.

 

[Mugby]

Depressingly, this could mean the wires on the main/fast lines stopping South of Kettering, because I don't think the Corby line can be accessed from Platforms 3&4. The last crossover is currently around the A509 Pytchley Road bridge. Project "Creeping Electrification" might end up starting with just getting the fast lines wired to Kettering station?

I think you're right but will there be any need for Corby trains to use the Fast lines when the service is electrified? When the re-quadrupling is completed at Wymington and also between Harrowden and Kettering South, won't Corby trains use the Slow lines all the way north of Bedford?

 

[InTheEastMids]

I think you're right but will there be any need for Corby trains to use the Fast lines when the service is electrified? When the re-quadrupling is completed at Wymington and also between Harrowden and Kettering South, won't Corby trains use the Slow lines all the way north of Bedford?

Depends how much time is lost Kettering to Bedford being restricted to 90 mph. On the basis of more-or-less no evidence whatsoever, I estimate ~1 minute Kettering-Welly, and maybe 2 from Welly to Bedford (if there are no significant bits below 90). You'd make most of that back with higher speed Kettering-Corby, faster approach to Bedford, faster accelerating EMUs and shorter dwell times then end to end it could be quite marginal.

Although it won't be popular when it's stuck behind a trainload of aggregates struggling up to Sharnbrook, or you want to run a 2 track railway for engineering works.

Seriously, NR have been preparing the MML electrification for donkeys years, so hopefully they know where the signal cables are. They surely must have smuggled a bit of prep work in with the Bedford-Corby capacity works, e.g. many bridges have already been raised. And I read somewhere on here that apparently the MML won't get expensive Armageddon-proofed OLE infrastructure that's going in on the GWR. Surely this is the moment to demonstrate competence, jump back down the cost curve and let Grayling have his moment to say, "Only under a Conservative Government does the public sector control its costs. Now, with a general election looming, it's time to announce yet again that we will electrify to these marginal seats in the East Midlands."

 

[B&I]

There will be no new electrification on classic lines (other than as part of other projects such as HS2 sundries) until the DfT has been able to demonstrate to the Treasury that any such project can be delivered on time and to budget by whomever is contracted to do the work.

Why does railway electrification have to demonstrate that, when (to pluck some random examples) road construction, public sector IT, and defence procurement rarely seem to have to?

 

[A0]

To cancel all the MML electrification beyond Kettering or Corby shows Grayling to be a man with no vision and no plan.

Do you actually understand how government works?

Such decisions are not at the whim of the Secretary of State - never have been, never will be.

I really despair at this kind of ill informed comment, usually made as political point scoring.

The simple fact is there is a pot of money £ x.

Network Rail have projects costing £ y and resources available to complete things 'z'.

Each project has to meet a set of benefits. If costs go up - benefits may not be realised.

The reality is because the GWML has taken so long, has run so far over budget it's had a direct impact on everything else. Add in the fact technology is making bi-mode rolling stock more viable - in the same way hybrid and electric cars are becoming more viable for everyday use as well.

 

[A0]

Why does railway electrification have to demonstrate that, when (to pluck some random examples) road construction, public sector IT, and defence procurement rarely seem to have to?

Well actually they do.

And projects in each of those fields are regularly cancelled or deferred because of previous over-runs. The fact you don't know about them doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

 

[HowardGWR]

I can see how projects can be delayed, due to overruns on budget of preceding projects, but I don't see why they should be cancelled. If a strategic decision has been made that an improvement is needed, it might suffer in timing, but only cancelled or subject to further review, on cost grounds, if there is specific evidence that the GWML project cost more in some unalterable way, as opposed to incompetence of implementation, or unforeseeable circumstances. All projects already have the latter built into their estimates, as risk costs.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Do you actually understand how government works? Such decisions are not at the whim of the Secretary of State - never have been, never will be. I really despair at this kind of ill informed comment, usually made as political point scoring. The simple fact is there is a pot of money £ x.

I have voted Conservative all my life. I really despair at this naivety. Where there is a political will there is a way.

As someone cynically posted upthread, as the next general election approaches - wow - all of a sudden the pot of money enlarges lots of marginal constituencies and MML gets the go ahead again. We see with the previous SoS supported it has to be admitted by the First Lord of the Treasury and also by the Chancellor electrification projects galore. We see with Grayling the reverse and bimodes being used as a cop out.

You can not blame posters and people like Roger Ford et al for stating what to us seems obvious. I started a thread about 2 years ago - electrification is not just about electrification. I am going to reread it.

 

[A0]

I have voted Conservative all my life. I really despair at this naivety. Where there is a political will there is a way.

As someone cynically posted upthread, as the next general election approaches - wow - all of a sudden the pot of money enlarges lots of marginal constituencies and MML gets the go ahead again. We see with the previous SoS supported it has to be admitted by the First Lord of the Treasury and also by the Chancellor electrification projects galore. We see with Grayling the reverse and bimodes being used as a cop out.

You can not blame posters and people like Roger Ford et al for stating what to us seems obvious. I started a thread about 2 years ago - electrification is not just about electrification. I am going to reread it.

The problem I have is the "personalisation" of this - i.e. it's 'x' who's to blame personally.

The only recent SoS who, in my opinion is fair game for criticism over his views was Prescott - but that's because there are pieces of 4'x2' in my local timber yard that are more intelligent than him. And he basically delivered nothing during his tenure except for a massive increase in congestion across the UK.

 

[B&I]

The problem I have is the "personalisation" of this - i.e. it's 'x' who's to blame personally.

The only recent SoS who, in my opinion is fair game for criticism over his views was Prescott - but that's because there are pieces of 4'x2' in my local timber yard that are more intelligent than him. And he basically delivered nothing during his tenure except for a massive increase in congestion across the UK.

So, blaming specific politicians for government decisions is a terrible, bad thing which no-one must do, unless it's a Labour poltician I don't like. I am reminded of Alexei Sayle's deathless line:- 'I'm not homophobic, but I one slept with a bloke who was'.

In my professional capacity, I watched Grayling's handiwork when he was Justice Secretary, or 'Lord Chancellor' (a title declined by his predecessor, a QC). Everything he touched in that role turned ro dark brown stuff. He seems to be repeating this performance at Transport. There is sawdust at your local timber yard which would be better at the job than Grayling is.

But you're right, it is unfair to lay all the blame on the shoulders of this one man. We are forgetting the man who, after several years playing at being chancellor, has now gone to play at editing newspapers. Perhaps if he had not called a pointless halt to almost all infrastructure spending in 2010, then pursued economic policies which have left the whole country outside London in recession ever since, these projects would be a bit further on by now.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Why does railway electrification have to demonstrate that, when (to pluck some random examples) road construction, public sector IT, and defence procurement rarely seem to have to?

And, are you suggesting that it's Treasury that are the blocker here, rather than DfT? I can assure you that is not the right way round at all.

 

[edwin_m]

If a minister is overruling civil servants, they can ask for a letter of direction which officially instructs them and puts it on record in case the decision is the subject of a later enquiry. That happened when a clause was added the Northern franchise ITT prohibiting use of Pacers. However I imagine many less clear-cut decisions can be sorted out witih dialogue. In particular I believe Grayling could have announced the decision on electrification as a "pause" rather than a final cancellation, which would have had the same effect in the short term but given NR and industry much more incentive to get their costs under control. It would also have been much better politics, at least if the motivation is to build concensus rather than to provoke confrontation.

 

[Senex]

And, are you suggesting that it's Treasury that are the blocker here, rather than DfT? I can assure you that is not the right way round at all.

In a way it's rather a relief to know it isn't the dead hand of the Treasury once again but rather just the idiocy of DfT over railway matters that we've known for so very many decades.

As to the personalisation AOwen objects to above, surely the mark of a strong minister who is really interested in his department and really knows his subject is that he can drive an agenda and get things done — and leave his mark. And over the years we've seen examples from both parties. But Transport has tended to be a short-term stopping-off point for ministers either on the way up or on the way down (rather like Education, unfortunately!), with no real interest in the subject or desire to do anything for the long-term national infrastructure. So anonymous civil servants rule, never answerable to anyone for the decisions they take and firmly based in London, which means that for most of them their only regular knowledge of the railways is as London commuters in what used to be the Network South-East area. (I leave aside the éminence grise supposedly almost single-handedly responsible for the bi-modes.)

 

[GRALISTAIR]

One only has to look at Scotland to see that if there is a political will there is a way. I totally agree with Edwin-m in saying Grayling should have announced a pause rather than a cancellation- very bad politics from failing Grayling

 

[GRALISTAIR]

The only recent SoS who, in my opinion is fair game for criticism over his views was Prescott - but that's because there are pieces of 4'x2' in my local timber yard that are more intelligent than him. And he basically delivered nothing during his tenure except for a massive increase in congestion across the UK.

Now I agree with you ! !

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Now I agree with you ! !

I've been at this awhile now, and you can personalise all you want - they're all idiots and are utterly interchangeable. It is merely that there is one idiot in the ministerial chair. We're hearing commitments being made by them that would actually require changes to the laws of physics, against the findings of many studies, to achieve even 10% of the claimed benefits, but the emperor's new clothes must be good, surely?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

But you're right, it is unfair to lay all the blame on the shoulders of this one man. We are forgetting the man who, after several years playing at being chancellor, has now gone to play at editing newspapers. Perhaps if he had not called a pointless halt to almost all infrastructure spending in 2010, then pursued economic policies which have left the whole country outside London in recession ever since, these projects would be a bit further on by now.

I think George Osborne was very generous to the railways, particularly in the CP5 settlement (remember "Electric Spine"?).
It's not his fault that NR got the planning and design of the GW (and other) projects so spectacularly wrong.
Having lost confidence in NR, it's going to take a lot of persuasion to get the DfT and Treasury onside again for electrification.
The current Chancellor (previous SoS for Transport) knows the railway all too well, for good or ill.

 

[cle]

They should set up some kind of separate electrification institute / school of excellence - and hone it to a fine art, indefinitely moving around the country as required and expanding as the economies of scale and productivity increase... but alas, we are here.

 

[deltic08]

Do you actually understand how government works?

Such decisions are not at the whim of the Secretary of State - never have been, never will be.

I really despair at this kind of ill informed comment, usually made as political point scoring.

The simple fact is there is a pot of money £ x.

Network Rail have projects costing £ y and resources available to complete things 'z'.

Each project has to meet a set of benefits. If costs go up - benefits may not be realised.

The reality is because the GWML has taken so long, has run so far over budget it's had a direct impact on everything else. Add in the fact technology is making bi-mode rolling stock more viable - in the same way hybrid and electric cars are becoming more viable for everyday use as well.

It has nothing to do with political point scoring. Grayling is a weak minister who happens to be a Tory. What he and you haven't grasped is that bimodes are much more expensive to build, maintain and operate than straight electrics and as a result fares will be higher than they need be.
To a certain point we can control the cost of electricity but have no control over diesel prices as it is a global commodity.
Disregarding diesel particulates and the effect that has on pulmonary and cardiac disease, the hundreds of thousands of tons of greenhouse gasses produced by bimodes on the MML north of Kettering completely flies in the face of the agreement Britain made at the Paris Summit to reduce pollution and greenhouse gases that causes global warming.